klibc - Mar 2009 - the return value of packet_peek()

Hello, all:

I am executing ipconfig under a terminal and find one thing:
If I execute ipconfig the first time, it will get an ip address from
dhcp server, If I execute ipconfig the second time (or more times),
since my TP-LINK TL-R402M router will give an icmp(ping) packet before
DHCPOFFER,
the ipconfig will fail after it receive the packet and tries unpack
teh packet in  packet_recv() since we have a packet form checking
there:

if (ntohs(ip->tot_len) > ret || ip->protocol != IPPROTO_UDP)
		goto free_pkt;

ip config will fall in a loop and always got the icmp packet instead
of DHCPOFFER packet in this situation.


If I change the retrun value of packet_peek and make a packet form
checking in more early stage, I can avoiding ipconfig fall in a loop
with icmp packet, like this:

--- /work/atcs/os_pkg/klibc-git/klibc/usr/kinit/ipconfig.old/packet.c	2009-03-11
15:30:45.000000000 +0800
+++ packet.c	2009-03-11 17:39:56.000000000 +0800
@@ -176,6 +176,8 @@
 	 */
 	ret = recvfrom(pkt_fd, &iph, sizeof(struct iphdr),
 		       MSG_PEEK, (struct sockaddr *)&sll, &sllen);
+			
+			
 	if (ret == -1)
 		return -1;

@@ -184,6 +186,10 @@

 	if (iph.ihl < 5 || iph.version != IPVERSION)
 		goto discard_pkt;
+		
+	if (iph.protocol != IPPROTO_UDP)
+		goto discard_pkt;
+	

 	*ifindex = sll.sll_ifindex;

@@ -191,7 +197,7 @@

 discard_pkt:
 	packet_discard();
-	return 0;
+	return -1;
 }

 void packet_discard(void)


This will make packet_peek return -1 if the packet is not what we
want. and affect the do_pkt_recv() process

static int do_pkt_recv(int pkt_fd, time_t now)
{
	int ifindex, ret;
	struct state *s;

	ret = packet_peek(&ifindex);
	if (ret < 0)
		goto bail;

	for (s = slist; s; s = s->next) {
		if (s->dev->ifindex == ifindex) {
			ret |= process_receive_event(s, now);
			break;
		}
	}

      bail:
	return ret;
}

we will not do the above for loop since we don't want the received packet.

There are two questions:
1. Are you plan to make ipconfig work with network card which already
have an ip?
2. Is it safely to change the return value to -1 in discard_pkg lable
of packet_peek()?

Thank you very much.

Shou-Lien Chen wrote:
> 
> There are two questions:
> 1. Are you plan to make ipconfig work with network card which already
> have an ip?
No.  It's not a full-blown DHCP client; it's "fire and
forget".
> 2. Is it safely to change the return value to -1 in discard_pkg lable
> of packet_peek()?
Have to think about it, but I suspect so.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.